Hayati Mohammed Amin, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 3300/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1968 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 13-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIMALENDU VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: T K VASA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 44AD

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : SMC BENCH : AHMEDABAD (BEFORE HONBLE SHR I T.K. SHARMA, J.M .) I.T.A. NO. 3300/AHD./2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-2007 HAYATI MOHAMMED AMIN, AHMEDABAD -VS- I.T.O., WARD-6(4), AHMEDABAD (PAN : ALWPM 7364E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.K.VASA, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIMALENDU VERMA, D .R. O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 11.10.2010 PASSED EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XVI, AHMEDABAD IN APPEAL NO. LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEA LS)-XVI/WD.6(4)/626/08-09/- FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE SUSTENANCE OF ADDITION OF RS.2,26,868/-, MADE BY THE AO, CONSIDERING THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 44AD OF THE I.T. ACT, BE DELETED. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, SHRI T.H.VASA APPEARED AND DREW THE ATTENTION OF THE BENCH TO PAG E NO.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHEREIN, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS MEN TIONED THAT FIVE NOTICES SENT TO THE ASSESSEE WERE RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITI ES WITH THE REMARK LEFT. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE PREMISES, ON WHICH THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) SENT THE NOTICES OF HEARING, WAS CLOSED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS OPERATING FROM THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS. HAYATI MOHAMMED AMIN C/O- LAXCON STEELS LIMITED PLOT NO.235, SARKHEJ BAVLA NH-8, SARI, TALUKA : SANAND, DIST- AHMEDABAD 2 ITA NO. 3300-AHD-2010 2.1 IN SUPPORT OF THE AFORESAID ADDRESS, THE COUNSE L OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THE REVISED FORM NO.36. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE LEA RNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) TO SERVE THE NOTICE THROUGH AFFIXTURE AND ADMITTEDL Y THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEAR NED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) BE SET ASIDE AND HE BE DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE AFRESH, AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE SIDES. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI VIMALENDU VERMA, D.R., A PPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS). HE SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO INFORM THE NEW ADDR ESS AND SINCE THIS WAS NOT DONE, THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APP EALS), IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, BE UPHELD. 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WERE ALSO CONSIDERED. ADMITTEDLY, THE LEARNED COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) DID NOT SERVE THE NOTICES OF HEARING THROUGH AFFIXTURE. ALL THE N OTICES SENT BY HIM WERE RETURNED BY POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK LEFT. IN THESE CIRCUM STANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT IT WILL MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, IF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARN ED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) BE SET ASIDE AND HE BE DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL A FRESH, AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE SIDES. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APP EAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10. 03.2011. SD/- (T.K. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 10 /03/2011 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE 2) THE DEPARTMENT. 3) CIT(A.) CONCERNED, 4) CIT CONCERNED, 5) D.R., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY` BY ORDER DEPUTY REGI STRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD TALUKDAR/SR.P.S. 3 ITA NO. 3300-AHD-2010